prowla

Well, at least 52% of the UK population are! 🙂

OK - thanks; I took your mansplaining as disagreement! 🙂

...and your terms "average" and "reasonable" are weighted by your own definitions. So, my point is that far from being definitive, the term in question is very subjective and is not defined in law. An example of the subjectiveness is this university's definition (https://www.lboro.ac.uk/internal/online-reporting/looking-for-information/racism/), which states that racism can only be performed by a "dominant" group against a "minoritized" (sic) group - that's not what the Equality Act says (I think!).

The man on the Clapham omnibus might make a different inference than the man on the Mersey ferry. BTW, I'm not arguing with the law itself, but rather against the assertion that it definitively defines the term. Incidentally, if it is so definitive, then why is there a multi-page document giving guidance on it (https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/racist-and-religious-hate-crime-prosecution-guidance), along with a supplementary multi-page document (https://www.cps.gov.uk/publication/public-statement-prosecuting-racist-and-religious-hate-crime)? If you have to read those documents in order to understand what the rules (law) are, then it is evidently not so definitive at all. I have my interpretation of the word, others have theirs, the UK law has verbiage on the matter, Loughborough University appears to state that only a majority group can manifest racism against a smaller group, the UN has its definition, Brazil has theirs, the USA theirs, and so-on.

It conflates a number of things: age, marital status, skin colour, disabilities into one overarching law. But, as you hint with your "wordy legalise" comment, it is imprecise and so does not define the term. As with most/all UK laws, items are open to interpretation and I would certainly say that the Act can be efficacious in providing the desired results. However, the term "racism" it is not defined. Therefore its meaning is open to interpretation.

I'd say there is a difference between a fan-fret and a copy of a specific instrument.

I can't see the word anywhere in that document. The fact that you can look at it and say yes and I can look at it and say no therefore demonstrates that your assertions here are flawed. And therefore the answer is no.

I know that exists, but does it define the word in question?

Is there such a thing?

Yet another fake-aged Fender copy yawn. At least these ones don't bear counterfeit Fender logos like some do.

Yes - there are plenty of definitions to choose from.

I wouldn't want to be in a band whose music/lyrics or image was of some disposition which really didn't align with mine. Whether or not I could be in a band or associate with someone with opposing or extreme views would depend upon how forcefully they were inclined to forward their views and how accepting they were that mine were different. Another consideration is whether their views expressed or known elsewhere led to any repercussions/issues. Essentially if anyone made me feel uncomfortable or threatened then I'd move on.

The only supplementary (apart from playing) exercises I've done have been: To stretch apart the fingers on my left (fretting) hand; over the years the span of my left hand tip of index finger to tip of pinky is about an inch more than my right. Touching each fingertip to my thumb. Generally wiggling fingers. Using a PC keyboard. I've never done anything strength-wise. Playing-wise I've generally learned songs - they help build the muscle memory and bring in different styles of playing. For the rght-hand I use a pick and/or fingers; I like to try and be able to play something by either method, but I tend to find pick is more precise and fingers more free-flowing. I think a deficiency of my playing is I don't know the scales, but when someone starts talking about mixolydian or whatever I often think "oh, that's like this one I play". I also think it's been remiss of me not to learn to read music, but maybe one-day I'll put serious effort in; OTOH, I subscribed to the idea that I want to play my stuff rather than be an automaton doing what someone else has written note-for-note.

When listening to talk radio I switch off if someone says "y'know" three times. (I don't know, but if you'd explain it instead of suggesting that I do know then that would probably be more informative.)

Probably the right choice!

I could've been "HORNER - The Twxx".

You need a volume pedal!

Adults on scooters.

In my opinion an irrational prejudice is an opinion.

How about flute-like sounds on synths?

Good point!

In the past few days I’ve seen ads with “if you’re looking at this you’ll know what it is” piece of hi-FI, a “stunning” amp, “Gb” memory, “very rare”, and one or two other instant swipe-left phrases.

It definitely devalues the sticker if you take the bass off it.

Are you asking me to rationalise my irrational prejudices? 🙂

Calling the bloke “Jaco”, as if he was a mate.